The Carolingian line first began with two important rival Frankish families, thePippinids andArnulfings, whose destinies became intermingled in the early 7th century. Both men came from noble backgrounds on the western borders of theAustrasia territory between theMeuse andMoselle rivers, north ofLiège.[6][7]
As repayment for their help during the Austrasian conquest, Chlotar rewarded both men with important positions of power in Austrasia. However, Arnulf was the first to gain. He was bestowed the bishopric of Metz in 614, entrusting him with the management of the Austrasian capital and the education of Chlotar's young son, the futureDagobert I.[10] This is a position he would hold until his retirement in 629 after Chlotar's death, when he left for a small ecclesiastical community near Habendum; he was later buried at the monastery ofRemiremont after his deathc. 645.[6]
Pippin was not immediately rewarded, but eventually was given the position ofmaior palatti or 'mayor of the palace' of Austrasia in 624. This reward secured Pippin a position of prime importance with the Merovingian royal court. The mayor of the palace would act as the mediator between the King and the magnates of the region; as Paul Fouracre summarises, they were 'regarded as the most important non-royal person in the kingdom.'[7] The reason Pippin was not rewarded sooner is not certain, but two mayors, Rado (613 –c. 617) and Chucus (c. 617 – c. 624), are believed to have preceded him and were potentially political rivals connected to the fellow Austrasian 'Gundoinings' noble family.[10][7] Once elected, Pippin served faithfully under Chlotar until the latter's death in 629, and solidified the Pippinids' position of power within Austrasia by supporting Chlotar's son Dagobert, who became King of Austrasia in 623.[7] Pippin, with support from Arnulf and other Austrasian magnates, even used the opportunity to support the killing of an important political rivalChrodoald, anAgilolfing lord.[9]
Following King Dagobert I's ascent to the throne inc. 629, he returned the Frankish capital back to Paris inNeustria, from whence it had been removed by Chlotar in 613. As a result, Pippin lost his position as mayor and the support of the Austrasian magnates, who were seemingly irritated by his inability to persuade the King to return the political centre to Austrasia.[9] Instead, Dagobert turned to the Pippinids' political rival family, theGundoinings, whose connections inAdalgesil,Cunibert, archbishop of Cologne, Otto andRadulf (who would later revolt in 642)[9] once again removed the Pippinid and Arnulfing influence in the Austrasia assemblies.[6]
Pippin did not reappear in the historical record until Dagobert's death in 638,[10] when he had seemingly been reinstated as mayor of Austrasia and began to support the new young KingSigebert III. According to theContinuations, Pippin made arrangements with his rival, ArchbishopCunibert, to get Austrasian support for the 10-year-old King Sigibert III, who ruled Austrasia whilst his brotherClovis II ruled over Neustria andBurgundy. Soon after securing his position once again, he unexpectedly died in 640.[9]
Following Pippin's sudden death, the Pippinid family worked swiftly to secure their position. Pippin's daughterGertrude and wifeItta founded and entered theNivelles Abbey, and his only sonGrimoald worked to secure his father's position ofmaior palatii. The position was not hereditary and therefore passed to another Austrasian noble, Otto, the tutor of Sigebert III.[6] According to theContinuations, Grimoald began to work with his father's accomplice Cunibert to remove Otto from office. He finally succeeded inc. 641, whenLeuthari II, Duke of Alamannia killed Otto under Grimoald's and, we must assume, Cunibert's orders.[9] Grimoald then became mayor of Austrasia. His power at this time was extensive, with properties inUtrecht,Nijmegen,Tongeren andMaastricht; he was even called 'ruler of the realm' byDesiderius of Cahors in 643.[6]
This could not have been done if Grimoald had not secured Sigibert III's support. The Pippinids already gained royal patronage from Pippin I's support, but this was further bolstered by Grimoald's role in Duke Radulf of Thuringia's rebellion. Just prior to Otto's assassination, inc. 640 Radulf revolted against the Merovingians and made himself King of Thuringia. Sigibert, with an Austrasian army including Grimoald and DukeAdalgisel, went on campaign and after a brief victory againstFara, son of the assassinatedAgilofing lord Chrodoald, the Austrasians met Radulf on theRiver Unstrut where he had set up a stronghold. What followed was a disorganized battle spread over several days, in which the Austrasian lords disagreed on tactics. Grimoald and Adalgesil strengthened their position by defending Sigibert's interests, but could not establish a unanimous agreement. During their final assault, the 'men ofMainz' betrayed the Austrasians and joined with Radulf. This penultimate battle killed many important Austrasian lords, including DukeBobo and CountInnowales, and resulted in Sigibert's defeat. TheContinuations offers a famous description of Sigibert being 'seized with the wildest grief and sat there on his horse weeping unrestrainedly for those he had lost' as Radulf returned to his camp victorious.[9]
Upon Sigibert's return from Unstruct, Grimoald, now mayor, began to build power for the Pippinid clan. He utilized the existing links between the family and ecclesiastical community to gain control over local holy men and women who, in turn, supported Pippinid assertions of power. Grimoald established links with Aquitanian and Columbianan missionariesAmandus andRemaclus, both of whom came to be influential bishops within the Merovingian court. Remaclus, in particular, was important as after becoming bishop of Maastricht, he established two monasteries:Stavelot Abbey and Malmedy. Under Grimoald's direction, the Arnulfings were also further established withChlodulf of Metz, son of St. Arnulf, taking the bishopric of Metz in 656.[6]
The final moment of Grimoald's life is an area that is disputed in both date and event, titled: 'Grimoald's coup'.[7] It involves Grimoald and his sonChildebert the Adopted taking the Austrasian throne from the true Merovingian KingDagobert II, son of the late Sigibert who died young at 26 years old. Historians likePierre Riché are certain that Sigibert died in 656, having adopted Childebert due to his lack of an adult male heir. Following this, young Dagobert II was then exiled and tonsured by Grimoald andDido of Poitiers, who then installed Childebert as King of Austrasia. Clovis II in Neustria, uncle to Dagobert, then reacted to the revolt and lured Grimoald and Childebert into Neustria, where they were executed.[6]
This story is only confirmed by the pro-Neustrian source,[11] theLiber Historia Francorum (LHF) and selected charter evidence. Other contemporary sources like theContinuations fail to mention the event and Carolingian sources likeAnnales Mettenses Priores (AMP) ignore the event and even deny Grimoald's existence.[10] As such, historianRichard Gerberding has suggested a different chronology and reading of theLHF, which places Sigibert's death on 1 February 651. According to a Gerberding narrative, Grimoald and Dido organised Dagobert's exile around 16 January 651 to Ireland at Nivelles and then, when Sigibert died a month later, they acted out the plan and tonsured Dagobert, replacing him with Childebert, who ruled until 657. Clovis II then immediately acted and invaded Austrasia, executing Grimoald and his son.[10]
Then, either in 657 or 662, the Neustrians (either Clovis II who died in 657 or his sonChlothar III) installed infant KingChilderic II to the throne of Austrasia, marrying him toBilichild, the daughter of Sigibert's widowChimnechild of Burgundy.[7] Grimoald and Childebert's deaths brought an end to the direct Pippinid line of the family, leaving the Arnulfing descendants from Begga and Ansegisel to continue the faction.[12]
Very little is known about Pippin's early life, but a controversial story fromAMP suggests that Pippin reclaimed power in Austrasia by killing a legendary 'Gundoin' as revenge for the assassination of his father Ansegisel. This story is regarded as slightly fantastical byPaul Fouracre, who argues theAMP, a pro-Carolingian source potentially written by Giselle (Charlemagne's sister) in 805 at Chelles, is that Pippin's role primes him perfectly for his future and demonstrates his family to be 'natural leaders of Austrasia.'[11] However, Fouracre does also acknowledge his existence in charter evidence and confirms that he was a political link to rival mayorWulfoald. These rivalries would make Pippin natural enemies with Gundoin, making the murder plausible as part of Pippin's rise to power.[7]
The Arnulfing clan reappear in the contemporary historical record inc. 676, when theLHF mentions 'Pippin and Martin' rising up against a tyrannicalEbroin, mayor of Austrasia.[6][7] Pippin II, now head of the faction, and Martin, who was either Pippin's brother or relative, rose up against Ebroin and gathered an army (potentially with the aid of Dagobert II who had been brought back to Austrasia by mayor Wulfoald).[7] According to theLHF, the Arnulfing army met Ebroin, who had gained the support ofKing Theuderic III, atBois-du-Fays, and they were easily defeated. Martin fled toLaon, from where he was lured and murdered by Ebroin atAsfeld. Pippin fled to Austrasia and soon receivedErmenfred, an officer of a royal fisc who had assassinated Ebroin.[6][13]
The Neustrians, with Ebroin dead, installedWaratto as mayor, and he looked for peace with the Austrasians. Despite an exchange of hostages, Warrato's sonGistemar attacked Pippin atNamur and displaced his father.[7] He died shortly thereafter and Warrato resumed his position, wherein peace was reached but tense relations remained until Warrato's death in 686. He left behind his wifeAnsfled and his sonBerchar, whom the Neustrians installed as mayor. Against his father's policy, Berchar did not maintain peace and incited Pippin into violence.[13]
In 687, Pippin rallied an Austrasian army and led an assault on Neustria, facing Theuderic III and the Neustrian mayor, now Berchar, in combat. They met at theBattle of Tertry, where theAMP records that Pippin, after offering peace which was rejected by Theuderic at Berchar's behest, crossed the riverOmignon at the break of dawn and attacked the Neustrians, who believed the battle won when they saw Pippin's camp abandoned. This surprise attack was successful and the Neustrians fled.[13] Following this victory, Berchar was either killed, as theAMP argues, by his own people, but theLHF suggests that it is more likely that he was murdered by his mother-in-law, Ansfled.[13] This moment was decisive in Arnulfing history as it was the first time that any of the faction had national control. Paul Fouracre even argues it is for this that theAMP starts with Pippin II, as a false dawn upon which Charles Martel would rebuild.[11] However, historians have discredited the importance of this victory.Marios Costambeys,Matthew Innes andSimon MacLean all show that the Tertry victory did not establish solid authority over Neustria immediately, evidenced by the fact that Pippin immediately installed 'Norbert, one of his followers' (as written in theLHF) and then his son Grimoald in 696 to ensure continued influence.[14][13]
Pippin II then became overall mayor of the royal palace under Theuderic II, becoming mayor of Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy.[6] His sonDrogo, from his wifePlectrude, was also imbued with power when he married Berchar's widow Adaltrude (potentially maneuvered by Ansfled) and was made Duke of Champagne.[15] Pippin was politically dominating and had the power to elect the next two Merovingian kings after Theuderic II died in 691; he installedKing Clovis IV (691–695),Childebert III (695–711) andDagobert III (711–715).[6] Pippin moved to secure further power by consolidating his position in Neustria, installing several bishops likeGripho, Bishop of Rouen andBainus at theAbbey of Saint Wandrille in 701, which was later owned along withFleury Abbey (founded by Pippin in 703).[7] Imbued with internal strength, Pippin also began to look outwards from the Frankish Empire to subdue the people, that theAMP records, who once were 'subjected to the Franks ... [such as] the Saxons, Frisians, Alemans, Bavarians, Aquitainians, Gascons and Britons.'[13] Pippin defeated the pagan chieftainRadbod in Frisia, an area that had been slowly encroached upon by Austrasian nobles and Anglo-Saxon missionaries likeWillibrord, whose links would later make him a connection between the Arnulfings and the papacy.[6] FollowingGotfrid, Duke of Alemannia in 709, Pippin also moved against the Alemans and subjugated them again to royal control.
As Pippin approached his death in late 714, he was faced with a succession crisis. Drogo, Pippin's oldest son, died in 707 and his second son Grimoald, according to theLHF, was killed whilst praying toSaint Lambert inLiège in 714 by Rantgar, suspected by Paul Fouracre to be a pagan.[15][13][7] Pippin, before his death, made his six-year-old grandsonTheudoald (Grimoald's son) his successor in Neustria, a choice that is believed to have been promoted by his wife Plectrude,[6] which was a political choice from within the direct family line, as Pippin had two adult illegitimate children,Charles Martel andChildebrand I, from a second wife or concubine namedAlpaida.[10] They were ousted so Theudoald (with Plectrude's regency) could take the throne, a choice that would result in disaster.
When Pippin II died in December 714, the Arnulfings' dominance over Francia disintegrated. TheLHF tells us that 'Plectrude along with her grandchildren and the king directed all the affairs of state under a separate government', a system which created tensions with the Neustrians.[13] Theudoald ruled uncontested for around six months, until June 715, when the Neustrians revolted. Theudoald and the Arnulfings' supporters met at theBattle of Compiègne on 26 September 715,[7] and after a decisive victory, the Neustrians installed a new mayorRagenfrid and, following Dagobert's death, their own Merovingian kingChilperic II.[13] Charter evidence suggests that Chilperic was the son of the former King Childeric II, but this would make Daniel in his 40s, which is quite old to take the throne.[7]
Following their victory, the Neustrians joined withRadbod, King of the Frisians and invaded Austrasia, aiming towards the Meuse river to take the heartland of the faction's support.[9] It is at this moment that Charles Martel is first mentioned in historical records, which note him surviving imprisonment by his step-mother, Plectrude. Charles managed to escape and mustered an Austrasian army to face the encroaching Radbod and the Neustrians. In 716, Charles finally met the Frisians as they approached and, although theAMP attempts equalize the losses, it is confirmed from the descriptions in theLHF and theContinuations that Charles was defeated with heavy losses.[9][13] Chilperic, Raganfred and, according to theContinuations, Radbod, then travelled from Neustria through the forest of theArdennes and raided around the riverRhine andCologne, taking treasure from Plectrude and her supporters. As they returned, Charles ambushed the returning party at theBattle of Amblève and was victorious, inflicting heavy losses on the Neustrian invaders.
In 717, Charles mustered his army again and marched on Neustria, taking the city of Verdun during his conquest.[6] He met Chilperic and Raganfred again at theBattle of Vinchy on 21 March 717 and was once again victorious, forcing them back toParis. He then swiftly returned to Austrasia and besieged Cologne, defeating Plectrude and reclaiming his father's wealth and treasure. Charles bolstered his position by installing the Merovingian kingChlothar IV in Austrasia as an opposing Merovingian to Chilperic II.[13] Despite not having a Merovingian king for around 40 years in Austrasia, Charles' position was weak at this time and he required the support of the established Merovingians to gather military support.[16] Despite his weaknesses, Charles' recent success had made him a greater political entity; as such, Chilperic and Raganfred could not win a decisive victory against him. So, in 718 they too sent embassies and won the support ofDuke Eudo of Aquitaine who, at their request, mustered 'a Gascon army' to face Charles. In response, Charles brought an army to the eastern Neustrian borders and faced Duke Eudo in battle at Soissons.[7] Duke Eudo, realising he was outmatched, retreated to Paris, where he took Chilperic and the royal treasury and left forAquitaine. Charles pursued them, according to theContinuations, as far as Orleans, but Eudo and the Neustrians managed to escape.[9] In 718, King Chlothar IV died and was not replaced; instead, Charles became the primary authority in Francia. He established a peace treaty with Duke Eudo that ensured Chilperic II was returned to Francia; thereafter, until Chilperic's death in 720 atNoyon, the kingship was restored with Carolingian control and Charles became themaior palatii in both Neustria and Austrasia.[16] Following Chilperic II's death, the Merovingian kingTheuderic IV, son of Dagobert III, was taken fromChelles Abbey and appointed by the Neustrians and Charles as the Frankish king.
With his ascension to the throne, several significant moments in Frankish history occurred. Firstly, theLHF ended, likely composed several years later in 727 and ended one of the several perspectives we have on Charles' ascension.[10] Secondly, and more importantly, the Arnulfing predominance in the faction ended and the Carolingian (translating to 'sons of Charles') officially began.[14]
Once the immediate dangers were dealt with, Charles then began to consolidate his position as sole mayor of the Frankish kingdom. The civil unrest between 714 and 721 had destroyed the continental political cohesion, and peripheral kingdoms like Aquitaine,Alemannia, Burgundy andBavaria had slipped from the Carolingian's grasp. Even though the faction had, by Charles Martel's time, established strong political control over Francia, loyalty to the Merovingian power within these border regions remained.[14]
Charles first set out to reinstate Carolingian dominance internally within Francia: theContinuations lists Charles' continuous maneuvers which solidified the campaigns generating the Carolingian military foundation. In 718, theAMP records that Charles fought against the Saxons, pushing them as far as the riverWeser[13] and following up with subsequent campaigns in 720 and 724 which secured the northern borders of Austrasia and Neustria.[16] He subdued his former enemy Raganfred atAngers in 724 and secured his patronage, removing the remaining political resistance that had continued to thrive in western Neustria.[12]
In 725, Charles set out against the peripheral kingdoms, starting with Alemannia. The region had almost gained independence during the reign of Pippin II and under the leadership ofLantfrid, Duke of Alemannia, as (710–730) they acted without Frankish authority, issuing law codes like theLex Alamannorum without Carolingian consultation. As recorded in the Alemannia source,[17] theBreviary of Erchanbert, the Alemanni 'refused to obey the duces of the Franks because they were no longer able to serve the Merovingian kings. Therefore, each of them kept to himself.'[15] This statement was true for more than just Alemannia and, just like in those regions, Charles brutally forced them into submission. Charles was successful in his first campaign, but returned in 730, the same year that Duke Lantfrid died and was succeeded by his brotherTheudebald, Duke of Alamannia.[7]
As successful as campaigning had been, Charles seemingly took inspiration fromAnglo-SaxonmissionarySaint Boniface, who in 719 was sent byPope Gregory II to convert Germany, in particular the areas ofThuringia andHesse, where he established the monasteries ofOhrdruf,Tauberbischofsheim,Kitzingen andOchsenfurt. Charles, realising the potential of establishing Carolingian-supportive episcopal centres, utilisedSaint Pirmin, an itinerant monk, to establish an ecclesiastical foundation onReichenau Island inLake Constance. He was expelled in 727 by Lantfrid and he retreated toAlsace, where he established monasteries with the support of theEtichonid clan, who were Carolingian supporters. This relationship gave the Carolingians long-term benefit from Pirmin's future achievements, which brought abbeys in the eastern provinces into Carolingian favour.[6]
In 725, Charles continued his conquest from Alemannia and invaded Bavaria. Like Alemannia, Bavaria had continued to gain independence under the rule of the Agilolfings clan who, in recent years, had increased links withLombardy and affirmed their own law codes, like theLex Baiuvariorum.[15] When Charles moved, the region was experiencing a power struggle betweenGrimoald of Bavaria and his nephewHugbert, but when Grimoald died in 725, Hugbert gained the position and Charles reaffirmed their support. TheContinuations records that when Charles left Bavaria, he took hostages, one of which wasSwanachild, who later would become Charles' second wife.[9] Paul Fouracre believes this marriage could have been intentionally forced, based upon the fact that Swanchild's heritage related her both to Alemannia and Bavaria. Not only would their marriage have allowed greater control over both regions, but it also would have cut the existing family ties that the Agilofings had to the Pippinid family branch. Plectrude's sisterRegintrud was married toTheodo of Bavaria, and this relation provided an opportunity for disenfranchised family members to defect.[7]
Following his conquest east of the Rhine, Charles had the opportunity to assert his dominance over Aquitaine and began committing military resources and performing raids in 731.[18] However, before he could make any major movements, Aquitaine was invaded byUmayyad warlordAbd al-Rahman I. Following Abd al-Rahman's ascension in Spain in 731, another local Berber lordMunuza revolted, set himself up atCerdanya and forged defensive alliances with the Franks and Aquitainians through a marriage to Eudo's daughter. Abd ar-Rahman then besieged Cerdanya and forced Munuza into retreat into France, at which point he continued his advance into Aquitaine, moving as far as Tours before he was met by Charles Martel. Carolingian sources attest that Duke Eudo begged Charles for assistance, butIan N. Wood claims these embassies have been invented by later pro-Carolingian annalists. Eudo was a main protagonist in theBattle of Toulouse (721), which famously stopped Muslim lordAl-Samh ibn Malik al-Khawlani's advances inNarbonne and gained Eudo praise in theLiber Pontificalis.[19]
Charles met the Muslim force at the famousBattle of Poitiers (732) and came out victorious. This moment cemented Charles Martel in historical records and gained him international praise.Bede, writing at the same time inJarrow, England, recorded the event in hisEcclesiastical History of the English People, and his victory gained Charles Martel the admiration of seminal historianEdward Gibbon who considered him the Christian saviour of Europe.[20][21] Although his victory was considered famous, in reality his victory was far less impactful, and Charles would not gain much control in Aquitaine until Eudo's death in 735. The victory may have given the Carolingians relative local support that potentially allowed Charles to assert dominance over Eudo's son and successorHunald of Aquitaine, but records of continued hostilities in 736 only further cemented that relations were strained.[22][14]
With a stronger establishment in Aquitaine, Charles made moves to assert his dominance into Burgundy.[23] The region, at least in the Northern areas, had remained controlled and allied with Frankish interest. Influential nobility likeSavaric of Auxerre, who had maintained near-autonomy and led military forces against Burgundian towns likeOrléans,Nevers andTroyes, even dying whilst besiegingLyon, were the key to Charles' support. As such, Charles made multiple attempts to both gain the faction's support and remove their authority. When Savaric died during Charles' early reign, he agreed to support Savaric's nephewBishop Eucherius of Orléans' claim to the bishopric. However, once Charles had established a powerful basis by 737, he exiled Eucherius, with the help of a man called Chrodobert, to the monastery ofSt Trond.[19] Charles took further military action in the same year to fully assert his authority, and installed his sonsPippin and Remigius as magnates. This was followed by the installation of political supporters from Bavaria and local supporters likeTheuderic of Autun andAdalhard of Chalon.[6]
This acquisition of land in southern France was supported by the increased social chaos that seemingly developed during the Civil War years. This was most apparent inProvence, where local magnates, likeAbbo of Provence, were incredibly supportive of Charles' attempts to reinstate Frankish power.[24] In 739, he used his power in Burgundy and Aquitaine to lead an attack with his brotherChildebrand I against Arab invaders and DukeMaurontus, who had been claiming independence and allying himself with Muslim emir Abd ar-Rahman.[25] It is likely due toChildebrand's sponsorship of the manuscript that his involvement is so extensively recorded in theContinuations.[26] According to the manuscript, Childebrand and Charles noticed the Arab army, with Maurontus' welcome, enteringAvignon and quickly moved against the alliance. They besieged the city and claimed victory; the Franks then made the decision to invadeSeptimania, takingNarbonne and flanking the Arab army. The Franks then fought off a support army sent from Spain underOmar-ibn Chaled at theRiver Berre. From there the Franks then pursued the retreating Arabs and ravaged the cities ofNîmes,Agde andBéziers before returning to Francia. Later that year, Charles and Childebrand returned to Provence, likely collecting more forces, and then forcing the rebellious Maurontus into 'impenetrable rocky fastnesses out to sea.'[26]Paul the Deacon later records in hisHistoria Langobardorum Maurontus received help from the Lombards, and his Arab allies then fled.[27] At this time, Charles then assumed control of the region and, judging from Charter evidence, appointed Abbo of Provence aspatricius (Patrician) in the region.[28]
Charles also ruled the Frankish realm, although the majority of his policies were centred upon his conquests and his military ventures. In 19th century historiography, historians likeHeinrich Brunner even centred their arguments around Charles' necessity for military resources, in particular the development of mounted warrior or cavalry that would peak in theHigh Middle Ages. However, in modern historiography, historians like Pierre Riche and Paul Fouracre have discredited his ideas as too simplistic and have aimed to depict more realistic fragments of development that may or not have been interdependent.[29] This was the period in which the Carolingians first began to establish themselves as fully independent from the Merovingian royalty.
Charles Martel has become notorious in historiography for his role in the development of the concept offeudalism. The debates are rooted in the arguments of historians likeFrançois-Louis Ganshof, who viewed Charles' reign as the birth of the 'feudal' relationship between power and property. This results from the increased use ofprecaria or temporary land grants by the Carolingians, who allocated and spread their power to their subordinates. Ganshof's arguments connect these ties to a military-tenure relationship; however, this is never represented in primary material, and instead is only implied, and likely derived from, an understanding of 'feudalism' in the High Middle Ages. Recent historians like Paul Fouracre have criticised Ganshof's review for being too simplistic, and in reality, even though these systems of vassalage did exist between lord and populace, they were not as standardised as older historiography has suggested. For example, Fouracre has drawn particular attention to the incentives that drew lords and warriors into the Carolingian armies, arguing that the primary draw was 'booty' and treasure gained from conquest rather than 'feudal' obligation.[29]
Although Charles' reign is no longer considered transitional in its feudal developments, it is seen as a transitional period in the spread of the existing system of vassals andprecaria land rights. Due to Charles' continued military and missionary work, the political systems that existed in the heartlands, Austrasia and Neustria, officially began to spread to the periphery.[29] Those whom Charles appointed as new nobility in these regions, often with lifetime tenures,[30] ensured that Carolingian loyalties and systems was maintained across the kingdoms. The Carolingians were also far more strict with their land rights and tenure than their Merovingian predecessors, carefully distributing their new land to new families temporarily, but maintaining their control. Merovingians kings weakened themselves by allocating too much of their royal domains to supporting factions; the Carolingians themselves seemingly became increasingly powerful due to their generosity. By giving away their land, the Merovingians allowed themselves to become figureheads and the 'do nothing kings' that Einhard prefaced in theVita Karoli Magni.[6][31]
Due to his vast military conquests, Charles often reallocated existing land settlements, including Church property, to new tenants. Ecclesiastical property and monasteries in the late Merovingian and Carolingian period were political centres and often closely related to the royal court;[32] as such they often became involved in political matters, which often overlapped with Charles' reallocation of land. This 'secularisation' of Church property caused serious tension between theCarolingian church and state, and often gave Charles a negative depiction in ecclastical sources. The reallocation of church land was not new by Charles' reign; Ian Wood has managed to identify the practice going back to the reigns of Dagobert I (629–639) and Clovis II (639–657).[33] The majority of the sources that depict Charles' involvement in Church land rights come from the 9th century, and are therefore less reliable, but two supposedly contemporary sources also identify this issue.[34] The first, a letter sent by missionary Saint Boniface to Anglo-Saxon kingÆthelbald of Mercia, called Charles' a 'destroyer of many monasteries, and embezzler of Church revenues for his own use...', condemning him for his use of Church property. This is supported by the second source, theContintuations, which related that, in 733 in Burgundy, Charles split theLyonnais between his followers, this likely including Church land.[35] Further chronicles like theGesta episcoporum Autissiodorensium and theGesta Sanctorum Patrum Fontanellensis Coenobii recorded monasteries losing substantial land. The monastery atAuxerre was reduced to a hundredmansus by Pippin III's reign, and at theAbbey of Saint Wandrille under AbbotTeutsind, who was appointed by Charles in 735/6, the Church's local property was reduced to a third its size.[29] Wood has also criticised this point and proven that the loss of land by the Church was in reality very small, the remaining land being simply leased as it went beyond the Church's capabilities.[36] Regardless, it is apparent that Charles' expansion of control consumed plenty of reallocated properties, many of which were ecclesiastical domains.
When King Theuderic IV died in 737, Charles did not install a Merovingian successor. Unlike his Carolingian predecessors, Charles was strong enough by the end of his reign to not rely on Merovingian loyalties. He had created his own power bloc through the vassals he installed in Frankish heartlands and peripheral states.[24] Even prior to Theuderic's death, Charles did act with complete sovereignty in Austrasia. It was only in areas like Neustria, where Carolingian opposition historically existed, that Charles knew he would face criticism if he usurped the throne.[37]
Therefore, until his death, Charles ruled asPrinceps or First Man/First Citizen, officially gaining the title with his uncontested leadership with the acquisition of Provence in 737.[38] This meant that the issue of kingship remained ever present for his successors who would have to work further to establish themselves as royal.
When Charles died in 741, he was buried atSt Denis in Paris. He made secure succession plans, likely learning from his father, that ensured Francia was effectively divided between his sons,Carloman and Pippin asmaior palatii. According to theContinuations, the eldest son, Carloman, was given control of the eastern kingdoms in Austrasia, Alammania and Thuringia, while Pippin was given the western kingdoms in Burgundy, Neustria and Provence.[39]
The Carolingian rulers did not give up the traditionalFrankish (andMerovingian) practice of dividing inheritances among heirs, though the concept of the indivisibility of the Empire was also accepted. The Carolingians had the practice of making their sons minor kings in the various regions (regna) of the Empire, which they would inherit on the death of their father, which Charlemagne and his son Louis the Pious both did for their sons. Following the death of the EmperorLouis the Pious in 840, his surviving adult sons,Lothair I andLouis the German, along with their adolescent brotherCharles the Bald, fought a three-year civil war ending only with theTreaty of Verdun in 843, which divided the empire into threeregna while according imperial status and a nominal lordship to Lothair who, at 48, was the eldest.[41] The Carolingians differed markedly from the Merovingians in that they disallowed inheritance to illegitimate offspring, possibly in an effort to prevent infighting among heirs and assure a limit to the division of the realm. In the late ninth century, however, the lack of suitable adults among the Carolingians necessitated the rise ofArnulf of Carinthia as the king ofEast Francia, a bastard child of a legitimate Carolingian king,Carloman of Bavaria,[42] himself a son of the First King of the Eastern division of the Frankish kingdom, Louis the German.
Lothair is the first of the three brothers to die, leaving the empire at the mercy of the other two. Finally, after many twists and turns, his domain is gradually attached to East Francia, with theScheldt marking the border between West and East Francia. The king of East Francia, at the same time, also recovers the title of emperor.[43][44]
It was after Charlemagne's death that the dynasty began slowly to crumble. His kingdom was split into three parts, each being ruled over by one of his grandsons. Only the kingdoms of the eastern and western portions survived, becoming the predecessors of modern Germany and France.[45] The Carolingians were displaced in most of theregna of the Empire by 888. They ruled inEast Francia until 911 and held the throne ofWest Francia intermittently until 987. Carolingian cadet branches continued to rule inVermandois andLower Lorraine after the last king died in 987, but they never sought the royal or imperial thrones and made peace with the new ruling families. One chronicler ofSens dates the end of Carolingian rule with the coronation ofRobert II of France as junior co-ruler with his father,Hugh Capet, thus beginning theCapetian dynasty.[46]
Viking attack according to a 12th century illumination.
TheVikings generally designate all the peoples of the North, coming from present-dayScandinavia. In the Carolingian period, they were first known asNormans (“men of the North”, origin of the nameNormandy) and later as Vikings. They sold amber, animal skins, and metals, and bought honey, wine, and everything they could not produce in their lands. They were present, in small groups, in most coastal towns of the Frankish Empire.[47][48]
Around800, the Vikings, without giving up trade practices, became aware of a new means of enrichment. Indeed, since they were not Christians, they did not have to respect theabbeys, which contained, with minimal defensive structure (a wall and sometimes a few guards), considerable treasure, consisting ofchasses,reliquaries, precious metal objects for worship… These objects were particularly sought after in this period of weak monetary circulation, when metal was important not only for its value but also for the prestige associated with it.[49]
From 800 to about850, the Vikings continued their trading practices while attempting raids on isolated monastic establishments whenever the opportunity arose. The first establishment to suffer was the monastery ofLindisfarne, on the British coast, attacked by the Vikings in793.
After this first attack, Viking pressure increased: they sailed up rivers aboard their shallow-draft ships, improperly called “drakkars”, and plundered the treasures of the abbeys before returning to Scandinavia. For the moment, these were only brief expeditions: the Normans plundered, carried off goods, and left, most often after burning the place. These attacks nevertheless terrified the population by their speed, violence, and also because they struck churches which, since the establishment of Christianity, had never been attacked. In841, the Normans attacked theAbbey of Jumièges and the city ofRouen; the monks had to flee from the danger of raids, carrying with them the relics of their saints. TheÎle de Noirmoutier was also repeatedly targeted by the Normans, to the point that the monks abandoned their monastery and settled about twenty-five km south ofNantes, at Déas, which becameSaint-Philbert-de-Grand-Lieu. In843,Nantes was taken and part of the population massacred. In the second third of the 9th century, most of the towns located along rivers were visited by the Normans.[50][51]At the end of the 9th century, the phenomenon grew in importance. These were now much more organized bands, who had decided in advance their routes and knew where to go. The expeditions were also more numerous, sometimes a hundred boats, compared to a small dozen at most at the beginning of the century. Finally, they no longer contented themselves with plundering and leaving. More and more often, they carried away the population to be sold as slaves and settled in conquered territories where they sometimes spent the winter.[52][53][54]
The Vikings ravagedEurope but also theIberian Peninsula, thenMuslim, andNorth Africa, without anyone being able to stop them. As it was impossible to control the entire territory and their strength lay in the speed of their fleets and the brutality of their expeditions, it was difficult to predict where they would attack. When they did not attack, the Vikings demanded the payment of heavy tributes. The quarrels among the sons ofLouisthe Pious hardly improved the situation.Lothair and his brotherLouis took little interest in the problem, which fell almost entirely toCharles, the youngest son, who inherited all the coastal territories. Charles, who would be nicknamedthe Bald, tried to build additional fortifications. He asked the leaders of the aristocracy to defend the threatened regions.Robertthe Strong (ancestor of theCapetians) was placed by the king at the head of a westernmarch; he died fighting the Vikings in866. CountOdo defendedParis against an attack coming up theSeine in885. These great lords acquired immense prestige in the struggle against the Scandinavian invader, prestige that contributed to the weakening of royal power. Military successes were now attributed to themarquises andcounts. The inability of the Carolingians to resolve the Scandinavian problem was evident: in911, by theTreaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte, KingCharlesthe Simple ceded the Lower Seine to the Viking chiefRollo. He entrusted him with the defense of the estuary and the river downstream of Paris. This decision was at the origin of the creation of theDuchy of Normandy. The Carolingians were forced to cede territories and deliver tributes to counter the Scandinavian threat. They were also absorbed by family quarrels.The climate of insecurity therefore accelerated the disintegration of Carolingian power.[51][55][56]
List of male-line members of the Carolingian dynasty
Male, male-line, legitimate, members of the house who either lived to adulthood, or who held a title as a child, are included. Heads of the house are in bold.
Carolingian family tree, from theChronicon Universale ofEkkehard of Aura, 12th century
The historianBernard Bachrach argues that the rise of the Carolingians to power is best understood using the theory of a Carolingiangrand strategy. A grand strategy is a long term military and political strategy that lasts for longer than a typical campaigning season, and can span long periods of time.[58] The Carolingians followed a set course of action that discounts the idea of a random rise in power and can be considered as a grand strategy. Another major part of the grand strategy of the early Carolingians encompassed their political alliance with the aristocracy. This political relationship gave the Carolingians authority and power in the Frankish kingdom.
Another class of civilians were required to serve in the military which included going on campaigns. Depending on one's wealth, one would be required to render different sorts of service, and "the richer the man was, the greater was his military obligation for service".[60] For example, if rich, one might be required as a knight. Or one might be required to provide a number of fighting men.
In addition to those who owed military service for the lands they had, there were also professional soldiers who fought for the Carolingians. If the holder of a certain amount of land was ineligible for military service (women, old men, sickly men or cowards) they would still owe military service. Instead of going themselves, they would hire a soldier to fight in their place. Institutions, such as monasteries or churches were also required to send soldiers to fight based on the wealth and the amount of lands they held. In fact, the use of ecclesiastical institutions for their resources for the military was a tradition that the Carolingians continued and greatly benefitted from.
It was "highly unlikely that armies of many more than a hundred thousand effectives with their support systems could be supplied in the field in a single theatre of operation."[61] Because of this, each landholder would not be required to mobilize all of his men each year for the campaigning season, but instead, the Carolingians would decide which kinds of troops were needed from each landholder, and what they should bring with them. In some cases, sending men to fight could be substituted for different types of war machines. In order to send effective fighting men, many institutions would have well trained soldiers that were skilled in fighting as heavily armored troops. These men would be trained, armored, and given the things they needed in order to fight as heavy troops at the expense of the household or institution for whom they fought. These armed retinues served almost as private armies, "which were supported at the expense of the great magnates, [and] were of considerable importance to early Carolingian military organization and warfare."[62] The Carolingians themselves supported their own military household and they were the most important "core of the standing army in the"regnum Francorum.[63]
It was by utilizing the organization of the military in an effective manner that contributed to the success of the Carolingians in their grand strategy. This strategy consisted of strictly adhering to the reconstruction of the regnum Francorum under their authority. Bernard Bachrach gives three principles for Carolingian long-term strategy that spanned generations of Carolingian rulers:
The first principle… was to move cautiously outward from the Carolingian base in Austrasia. Its second principle was to engage in a single region at a time until the conquest had been accomplished. The third principle was to avoid becoming involved beyond the frontiers of the regnum Francorum or to do so when absolutely necessary and then not for the purpose of conquest".[64]
This is important to the development of medieval history because without such a military organization and without a grand strategy, the Carolingians would not have successfully become kings of the Franks, as legitimized by the bishop of Rome. Furthermore, it was ultimately because of their efforts and infrastructure that Charlemagne was able to become such a powerful king and be crowned Emperor of the Romans in 800. Without the efforts of his predecessors, he would not have been as successful as he was and the revival of the Roman Empire in the West was likely to have not occurred.
^abcdefghijklmnopqrRiché, Pierre (1993). Peters, Edward (ed.).The Carolingians: A Family Who Forged Europe. Middle Ages Series. Translated by Allen, Michael Idomir. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 14,17–18,20–23, 25,30–31, 33, 35, 42.
^abcdefghijklmnopqFouracre, Paul (2000).The Age of Charles Martel. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. pp. 28,34–35,37–40, 48, 60, 70, 106,108–109.
^McKitterick, Rosamond (2008).Charlemagne: The Formation of a European Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 57n.
^abcdefghijkThe Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar with its continuations. Translated by Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. 1960. pp. 32, 43,50–52,73–75, 87.
^abcdefgGerberding, Richard A. (1987).The Rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 7, 61, 65, 118, 145.
^abcFouracre, Paul (2005). "The Long Shadow of the Merovingians". In Story, Joanna (ed.).Charlemagne: Empire & Society. Manchester: Manchester University Press. pp. 6,10–11.
^abCollins, Roger (2010).Early Medieval Europe 300–1000. Palgrave History of Europe (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 264, 266.
^abcdefghijklPaul, Fouracre; Gerberding, Richard (1996).Late Merovingian France: History and Hagiography 640–720. Manchester Medieval Sources Series. Manchester: Manchester University Press. pp. 91–94,358–359, 365.
^abcdCostambeys, Marios; Innes, Matthew; MacLean, Simon (2011).The Carolingian World. Cambridge Medieval Textbooks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 40, 42,50–51.
^abcFouracre, Paul (1995). "Frankish Gaul of 814".The New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 88.
^Goosman, F.C.W. (2013).Memorable crises: Carolingian historiography and the making of Pippin's reign, 750–900. Amsterdam. p. 223.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Fouracre, Paul (1995). "Frankish Gaul of 814".The New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 88, 90.
^Bede (1968).A History of the English Church and People. Penguin Classics. Translated bySherley-Price, Leo;Latham, R. E. London: Penguin Books. p. 330.
^Gibbon, Edward (1839). Hilman, H. H. (ed.).The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Vol. X. London: John Murray. pp. 23–27.
^Collins, Roger (1998).Charlemagne. Basingstoke: MacMillan Press Ltd. p. 30.
^Collins, Roger (2010).Early Medieval Europe 300–1000. Palgrave History of Europe (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 264, 266, 269.
^abFouracre, Paul (1995). "Frankish Gaul of 814".The New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 88–90.
^Fouracre, Paul (2000).The Age of Charles Martel. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. pp. 28,34–35,37–40, 48, 60, 70,96–97, 106,108–109.
^abThe Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar with its continuations. Translated by Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. 1960. pp. 32, 43,50–52,73–75, 87, 96,102–103.
^Paul the Deacon (1829). Pertz, G. (ed.).Historia Langobardorum. Vol. II. Hanover: Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores. pp. 262–268.
^abcdFouracre, Paul (2000).The Age of Charles Martel. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. pp. 28,34–35,37–40, 48, 60, 70,96–97, 106,108–109, 121,137–154.
^Collins, Roger (2010).Early Medieval Europe 300–1000. Palgrave History of Europe (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 264, 266, 269, 271.
^Einhard (2008).Two Lives of Charlemagne: Einhard and Notker the Stammerer. Translated by Ganz, David. London: Penguin Books. pp. 18–19.ISBN978-0-140-45505-2.
^de Jong, Mayke (1995). "Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer". In McKitterick, Rosamond (ed.).The New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 622.
^Fouracre, Paul (1995). "Frankish Gaul of 814". In McKitterick, Rosamond (ed.).The New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 88–90, 91.
^Collins, Roger (1998). "The Making of the Carolingian Dynasty".Charlemagne. Basingstoke: MacMillan Press Ltd. p. 30.
^The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar with its continuations. Translated by Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. 1960. pp. 32, 43,50–52,73–75, 87,96–97,102–103.
^Lewis, Andrew W. (1981).Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State. Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press, p. 17.ISBN0-674-77985-1.
Reuter, Timothy.Germany in the Early Middle Ages 800–1056. New York: Longman, 1991.[ISBN missing]
MacLean, Simon.Kingship and Politics in the Late Ninth Century: Charles the Fat and the end of the Carolingian Empire. Cambridge University Press: 2003.[ISBN missing]
Leyser, Karl.Communications and Power in Medieval Europe: The Carolingian and Ottonian Centuries. London: 1994.[ISBN missing]
Lot, Ferdinand. (1891). "Origine et signification du mot «carolingien»."Revue Historique,46(1): 68–73.
Oman, Charles.The Dark Ages, 476–918. 6th ed. London: Rivingtons, 1914.
Painter, Sidney.A History of the Middle Ages, 284–1500. New York: Knopf, 1953.
Legend: → ≡ "father of", · ≡ "brother of" Begga, the daughter of Pepin I, married Ansegisel, the son of Arnulf of Metz, and was the mother of Pepin II.
